"Yes, you can easily become a master. All you need to do is some serious, focused work on your play.
That 'chess is 99% tactics and blah-blah' thing is crap. Chess is several things (opening, endgame, middlegame strategy, positional play, tactics, psychology, time management...) which should be treated properly as a whole. getting just one element of lay and working exclusively on it is of very doubtful value, and at worst it may well turn out being a waste of time." - IM pfren (August 21,2017)
My System - Nimzowitch ?
Sort:
Aug 30, 2017
0
#3
BobbyTalparov wrote:
kindaspongey wrote:
"Yes, you can easily become a master. All you need to do is some serious, focused work on your play.
That 'chess is 99% tactics and blah-blah' thing is crap. Chess is several things (opening, endgame, middlegame strategy, positional play, tactics, psychology, time management...) which should be treated properly as a whole. getting just one element of lay and working exclusively on it is of very doubtful value, and at worst it may well turn out being a waste of time." - IM pfren (August 21,2017)
Your ability to regurgitate quotes out of context in a completely meaningless and, in this case, misleading manner never ceases to amaze.
I agree haha
Aug 30, 2017
0
#4
cejilla wrote:
Hi, I am a begginer (900-1000 ELO in chess.com), I know the opening principles, typical tactics... Do you think that My System (by Nimzowitch) would be a usefull book for me, or is it recommended just for more advanced players?
No! It is not a book for you. At your level you should get the "Winning Chess" series by Yasser Seirawan.
Mein System is not intended for new beginners
"If you want to improve in classical ( slow ) chess you have to work on all 3 phases of the game . You should spend more time on what you are weakest at ... trying to eliminate weakness . If you are usually lost when you reach an ending ( and dont reach endings often ) then it makes little sense to spend the bulk of your study time on endings . If you reach middlegames only to find yourself worse , or even losing already your opening needs work ... etc ." - NM Reb (August 30, 2017)
CoffeeAnd420 wrote: "... Still obsessed with the opening, huh? It's amazing that no matter how clear and obvious it becomes that tactics, endgames, and middlegame planning are 99% of the game, some of you are still going to waste your time trying to get a half a pawn advantage in the opening. Newsflash: Any sound tactical player can play the opening just fine without studying theory at all. At under 1800 or under 1600? Absolutely. The opening is by FAR the least important (not really important at all) part of the game.
This is why some of you have been playing for 30 years and are still under 1400 FIDE. You've never actually dug into the meat and potatoes of the game. All that 'hard work' you put in studying openings was for absolutely nothing.
I love what the NM (NMs in the USCF don't even count anymore. They all got there playing nothing but rapid chess) suggests: If you never get to the point of seeing endgames, you should study openings more. LOL. Unbelievable that someone could have been playing chess up to the level of NM and have such a drastic misunderstanding of the game lol.
To answer the OP: Yes. My System is the bible of positional chess. You will get far more out of reading that than listening to guys here who are rated 800 in correspondence. Obviously."
Who said you should study openings more, if you never get to the point of seeing endgames? In this thread, has anyone said anything about putting "hard work" into studying openings? Have there been times when a "sound tactical player" had trouble playing against the Evans Gambit without preparation? Is tactical ability a matter of degree or just a sound-or-unsound thing?
"... the NM title is an honor that only one percent of USCF members attain. ..." - IM John Donaldson (2015)
http://www.jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/Reaching-the-Top-77p3905.htm
"... This book is the first volume in a series of manuals designed for players who are building the foundations of their chess knowledge. The reader will receive the necessary basic knowledge in six areas of the game - tactcs, positional play, strategy, the calculation of variations, the opening and the endgame. ... To make the book entertaining and varied, I have mixed up these different areas, ..." - GM Artur Yusupov (2010)
One's tactical skill has to survive the opening ... If you are an unprepared 1800-level tactician going up against a booked up 2600-level opening, then regardless of who is pushing the opposing pieces, you will find yourself in trouble early and often. The solution? Obviously, it is to become a 2900-level tactician so that you can get a playable or even better position against any opening. Alternatively, you could decide to only play in matches, so that if you initially fall for a booked-up fish's one or two opening surprises, you can still steer the remainder of the match games away from their opening prep and toward your strengths. However, since most class players playing in tournaments are not playing matches, then studying openings is a waste of time if they are below GM-level tactical proficiency. Therefore, become a GM-level tactician before anything else tactics tactics tactics blah blah blah my logic is flawless.
Think using own brain like a man -Goram
Aug 31, 2017
0
#10
it might be a old classic.i must get it along with silman's complete endgame course
CoffeeAnd420 wrote:
... Never got into Silman or Heisman, myself. ... Personally, I don't think Silman or Heisman have a clue for the level they pretend they're on.
What level do you think they are "pretend"ing to be on? Anyway:
"Jeremy Silman's HOW TO REASSESS YOUR CHESS is an example of a good book which explains many important ideas in clear terms." - GM John Nunn (2006)
"... Silman’s Complete Endgame Course ... has already caught on with the average player in a big way, confirming Silman's status as the king of instructional writers. ..." - IM John Watson (2007)
http://www.theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/theres-an-end-to-it-all
CoffeeAnd420 wrote:
... They pretend to be on the level of a Seirawan or a Yermolinsky. I mean, they're writing books that compete for sales in the same market.
Is there any chess writer who is not, in your view, pretending "to be on the level of a Seirawan or a Yermolinsky"? Is there anything wrong with the idea of Silman being on the level of some of those Winning Chess series books? How about Heisman and the first book in the Winning Chess series?
Play Winning Chess by Seirawan and Silman
http://seagaard.dk/review/eng/bo_beginner/ev_winning_chess.asp?KATID=BO&ID=BO-Beginner
The Road to Chess Improvement by Alexander Yermolinsky
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708233827/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/road.txt
http://theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/an-exceptional-chess-book
Chess Explained: The Classical Sicilian by Alex Yermolinsky
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627074459/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen85.pdf
http://theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/openings-2006-complementary-and-unusual
CoffeeAnd420 wrote:
There's nothing to debate or argue about here, man. It's just a difference of opinion. In fairness, I'll give some of the literature and links you've posted a second (and in some cases first) look.
Well, I suspect the issue here is your notion of what "pretend"ing is going on. Anyway, here are some Heisman books:
Back to Basics: Tactics by Dan Heisman (2007)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708233537/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review585.pdf
A Guide to Chess Improvement by Dan Heisman (2010)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708105628/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review781.pdf
Good Chess Books for Beginners and Beyond....
https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/good-chess-books-for-beginners-and-beyond
One can get some idea of the lasting scope of the respect for My System by looking at:
https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-best-chess-books-ever
Still, it might be noted that My System apparently did not occur to GM Yasser Seirawan as something to include in his list of personal favorites, and Aaron Nimzowitsch was not identified by the GM as a very worthy author.
Also, My System has accumulated some direct negative commentary over the years.
"... I found [the books of Aaron Nimzowitsch to be] very difficult to read or understand. ... [Nimzowitsch: A Reappraisal by Raymond Keene explains his] thinking and influence on the modern game in a far more lucid and accessible way. ... The books that are most highly thought of are not necessarily the most useful. Go with those that you find to be readable; ..." - GM Nigel Davies (2010)
In 2016, IM pfren wrote:
"My System is an iconoclastic book. A lot of things in there is sheer provocation, and it does need an expereienced player to know what exactly must be taken at its face value.
I love 'My System', and I have read it cover to cover one dozen times, but suggesting it to a class player is an entirely different matter."
"[Some things] ARE wrong, and it's not easy for a non-advanced player to discover those wrong claims.
Nigel Short has claimed that 'My System' should be banned. Stratos Grivas says that the book is very bad. I don't share their opinion, but I am pretty sure that there are more useful reads for class players out there."
Although he is a fan of My System, IM John Watson similarly acknowledged (2013) that:
"... Not everything in it has stood the test of time, ..."
http://theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/john-watson-book-review-108-of-eplus-books-part-2-nimzowitsch-classics
One last point to keep in mind is that, even if My System would eventually help a player, it might not necessarily be helpful to a player now.
"... Just because a book contains lots of information that you don’t know, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it will be extremely helpful in making you better at this point in your chess development. ..." - Dan Heisman (2001)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140626180930/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman06.pdf
A My System sample can be seen at:
https://www.qualitychess.co.uk/ebooks/MySystem-excerpt.pdf